The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Loading ...

Loading ...

This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe

Image via Wikipedia

The day after her promotion at a midsize technology company, Kathleen walked into the office and felt a distinct chill. Her female colleagues stood in clusters, whispering and glancing in her direction.

In the weeks to follow, she became the subject of office rumors. She was left out of group lunches and was suddenly out of the loop of critical information. She was decidedly alone, emotionally abandoned by the women she had considered friends; a victim caught unaware.

I witnessed this and did nothing about it.

Welcome to the world of relational aggression – the single most damaging and often-used weapon in a woman’s arsenal. It was the stuff of playgrounds and junior high, and most of us thought we had left it behind as we grew into women and moved on to more mature venues. The truth is, however, that the same behaviors that wound and traumatize us as girls are alive and well in the workplace, undermining our career success.

Women tend to use relationships as their weapon of aggression, which is how the term “relational aggression” – or RA – emerged. It’s a subtle art of emotional devastation that can last years or even a lifetime.

Women are often considered – especially in the cutthroat business world – as the kinder, gentler sex. Stereotypically, women are less confrontational and less competitive than their male counterpoints. Women like harmony and are better relationship-builders. Some say that women are the transformational leaders of tomorrow because they are more empowering. Are these characterizations accurate? Well, it depends.

Perhaps it’s easiest to think of this in terms of “on the table” and “under the table” communication and conflict-management styles. Typically, men deal with issues by putting them on the table – having the debate, the tug-of-war, then settling the matter and moving on. They’re generally more comfortable confronting the issue and driving to conclusion – win or lose.

Women, on the other hand, typically are more comfortable dealing with issues under the table – instead of being direct and “confrontational,” they’re more comfortable working their issues covertly and through other people. Sometimes this indirect form of communication can be effective when done carefully and with positive intent. The truth, however, is that it is more likely to be damaging and counterproductive as women use it to further their agenda or take revenge – predominantly against other women – by launching undercover smear campaigns, spreading malicious rumors, gossiping or icing someone out. Meanwhile, other women who may disapprove of the situation stand quietly to the side, fearful of becoming targets themselves.

With all the well-documented evidence that women have a tougher time achieving career success than men do, one would think they’d be ever more supportive of one another, banding together in a shared goal of better understanding how to navigate the complex corporate ladder. If only.

As it turns out, women are often the first to criticize and sabotage one another. Scores of studies show that women are tougher on women than men are; that women treat female leaders with less respect and support than they do male leaders; that women tend to reject work submitted by other women twice as many times than the same work submitted by men. And the list goes on.